Since it opened in September 2007, this nursing program has been using faculty developed MCQ examinations as the only method to assess student learning and assign grades. Despite an excellent initial NCLEX-RN pass rate for every graduating class, the faculty expressed concerns about a high student attrition rate and inability to retain clinically proficient students due to failing theory grades. I conducted an exploratory case study and the following questions were asked:
What are the issues related to the use of teacher-developed MCQ examinations as the only method of student assessment and evaluation in the theory component of courses at a suburban associate degree nursing program?
Subquestions included:
1. How has using only teacher-developed MCQ examinations impacted the teaching/learning process?
2. How has using only teacher-developed MCQ examinations impacted the teacher/ student relationship?
3. How are students assessed formatively in the theory component of the nursing courses?
Following categorical analysis, three major themes emerged. Using only one method to assess student learning and assign grades has:
Limited the opportunity for formative assessment of student learning ,
Limited the development of metacognition of the part of students. To address these issues a faculty professional development workshop about the assessment of student learning was designed based upon current educational best practices.
Since the completion of this research, many changes have occurred at the
program. The original director of nursing who gave permission for this study has retired and the former program coordinator accepted the directorship. Following that
appointment, I interviewed for, and ultimately accepted the position of program
coordinator. I am now in a position to facilitate the implementation of needed revisions to the assessment of student learning practices at the nursing program.
In this section, I will explain the strengths and limitations of my capstone research and faculty development project and discuss what I have learned about myself over the course of this lengthy educational journey in my professional life as a nurse, an educator, a researcher, and a scholar/practitioner.
Project Strengths
The primary strength of the Faculty Professional Development Workshop (FPD) is its format. I designed it based upon the most recent evidence for FPD best practices (Desimone, 2009), and used a program planning model (Vella, 2008) that required active learning on the part of participants. Desimone’s conceptual framework is evident in every aspect of this workshop. It is content focused, coherent, uses active learning strategies, promotes collaborative participation, and is of sufficient duration to ensure transfer of learning.
I also designed the program based upon my own experiences as a learner
participating in FPD. Too often, I have attended conferences, seminars, and conventions when the primary teaching strategy was PowerPoint presentations and there was no opportunity for me to actively participate. I often returned home remembering little of what I learned and placed the handouts in a file only to be forgotten and eventually discarded. I knew that the programs that meant the most to me were the ones that required me to listen intently and do a significant amount of work.
Doyle (2011) described what I was trying to do with this workshop best when he stated “It is the one who does the work who does the learning” (Doyle, 2011, p. 7). This is a tenet of constructivism and the workshop as a learning method evolved from that theory (Brandon & Alf, 2010). This workshop builds upon the faculty’s previous knowledge and experiences and enables them to construct new ideas upon that foundation. It also allows faculty to acquire new information using the Five E’s of Learning (Bybee, 2009). To meet the learning objectives participants are required to engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate the content.
Project Weaknesses
While I believe strongly that this workshop has been designed based upon the most recent literature and best practices; ultimately, I have no control over the
participants. My colleagues may come to this workshop with an open mind and be excited about participating in the learning tasks I have designed; or, they can attend and decide to be passive recipients. I have tried to address this aspect by creating concrete
learning tasks for each session and making the content relevant for their professional and educational needs.
Another potential weakness is that many aspects of current curriculum of the nursing program are teacher-centered, not student-centered which may make
implementation of a variety of formative assessment difficult in some situations. Lecture remains the primary method of teaching for some of the faculty as classes usually contain 75-90 students who are housed in a large lecture hall with stationary chairs. This may leave little opportunity to use small group or problem based methods to formatively assess student learning. Nilson (2010) noted that while a lecture is a good method to convey factual knowledge, it is not the best to promote critical thinking and problem solving skills. Integrating active learning into a lecture setting is difficult but not impossible and some faculty may need guidance in that area. The goal of the workshop is to give the faculty tools to use formative and authentic assessment methods; this can be challenging in a content- laden curriculum with large class sizes.
Potential Alternative Projects
Curriculum change is a priority at the nursing program and currently the faculty are conducting a review of the literature and researching successful program models. An entirely new curriculum is being considered and there are plans to obtain additional laboratory and classroom space once a new building on campus is completed. The director of nursing education in conjunction with all faculty and program stakeholders produced a 5 year strategic plan outlining all of the long and short terms goals for the nursing program.
There are also many other ways to address faculty professional development needs (POD, 2013). Peer coaching is an excellent strategy to establish feedback and reciprocity among professionals (Donner & Wheeler, 2009; Waddell & Dunn, 2005). Peer coaching was first described by Joyce and Showers (1982) and involves teachers giving support and assistance to their peers. In their original research, the authors (1982, 1996) found enhanced transfer of learning and long term retention of new learning.
In addition, peer coaching decreased faculty’s feelings of isolation, and increased collegiality. It is non-evaluative in nature and mutually beneficial to both the coach and the learner. Curriculum change is a priority at the nursing program and currently the faculty are conducting a review of the literature and researching successful program models. A new format for course sections is being discussed and there are plans to obtain additional laboratory and classroom space once a new building on campus is completed. The director of nursing education in conjunction with all faculty and program
stakeholders produced a 5-year strategic plan outlining all of the long and short terms goals for the nursing program.
Joyce and Showers (1982) described three types of peer coaching and named them mirroring, collaboration, and expert. Since the nursing faculty are experienced educators, expert coaching would be the best format. The expert coach has more expertise or familiarity with a subject. Currently at the program, five faculty have been identified by their peers as experts at student assessment. Similar to mentoring, the expert coach encourages reflection, analysis, support, and professional development.
Reciprocity is enhanced by a mutual commitment and agreement that peer coaching is not evaluative and all discussions are confidential (Waddell & Dunn, 2005).
Peer coaching teams must agree to practice the new skill, support one another in designing and implementing new strategies, and collect data about how this change or new skill impacts student learning outcomes. Both the coach and the learner need to make a time commitment to this process (Joyce & Showers, 1982). The amount and design of coaching sessions vary in the literature (Houston & Weaver, 2008; Mc Gatha, 2008). I believe this method would also be successful to address faculty learning needs in the area of assessment of student learning, however, it is often a lengthy process and not all experts are effective coaches. For this, reason I ultimately decided to use the workshop format.
What was Learned about the Process
I vividly remember during my first semester at Walden reading Brookfield’s seminal work (1987) about critical thinking. In the introduction he wrote: “thinking critically, reflecting on the assumptions underlying our and other’s ideas and actions, and contemplating alternative ways of thinking and living-is one of the important ways in which we become adults” (p. x). If I may be so daring as to paraphrase him, I believe that thinking critically and reflecting on our underlying assumptions and beliefs is the first and the most important step in becoming a scholar. In the next section I will outline what I learned about scholarship, program development, leadership, and change over the course of this capstone project.
Scholarship
The NLN, The American Association of Colleges of Nursing, and the Canadian Association of Schools of Nursing (CASN) have all defined scholarship in nursing education based upon Boyer’s (1990) definition. All of these organizations stressed that scholarship in nursing education is evident by a wide range of activities that include “the generation, validation, synthesis, and/or application of knowledge to advance the
teaching, research, and practice of nursing” (CASN, 2013, p. 2). In my opinion, nursing education scholars are those individuals who contribute significantly to the body of nursing education knowledge. Scholars are the experts, the researchers, the theorists, the role models, the mentors, and the leaders of my chosen profession.
Research is an integral part of scholarship, and when I started my capstone project I knew that I was in a good position to conduct a rigorous research project. In my
graduate program, I was required to design and implement a pilot research study with two classmates. As a nurse practitioner, I was the primary investigator for a clinically focused descriptive pilot study which was well received and published in a peer reviewed journal (Siegel, 2006). I served for 4 years on the Nursing Research Committee at my employing hospital and taught basic research concepts to nursing students at the diploma and
associate degree levels. I am also an article reviewer for two leading refereed nursing journals.
However, writing this capstone project has convinced me that scholarship is about so much more than research alone. It is about critically reading the literature and
open and value all opinions and world views. A scholar reflects daily upon his or her professional responsibilities and asks how improvement is achieved.
When my proposal was accepted, I was asked by the nursing representative on the hospital’s IRB to present my proposal to the annual nursing research day. I hesitated and told her that staff nurses would not be interested in this topic and I did not want to bore them with nursing education problems or research. She would not back down and I relented and did present my topic. After my presentation, I was approached by two faculty members from other nursing programs that were in attendance. They commented positively on my research questions and said they looked forward to hearing me discuss my research findings at the next annual research day.
I was about to leave when five nursing students from another program approached me and shared with me that they felt exactly as my students did when they read or
processed teacher-made MCQ examinations. The students said that they were going to share my handout about my proposal with their faculty. It was in that moment that I realized that I was living the scholarship of teaching and learning. I learned that even simple, locally conducted research studies contribute to the overall body of nursing and higher education knowledge and may impact others.
As I was reviewing the literature for this section, I came across multiple
definitions of scholars and scholarship. Following an exhaustive review of the literature, Martin, Benjamin, Prosser, and Trigwell (as cited in Mc Kinney, 2004) determined that there were three dimensions of scholarship. They wrote, “The scholarship of teaching is three related activities; engagement with the existing knowledge…self-reflection…on
one’s discipline, and public sharing of ideas about teaching” (p.1). As I thought about this definition, I concluded that when I presented my proposal I was fully engaged in the scholarship of teaching and learning. I was presenting the best evidence, reflecting upon it, promoting reflection on the part of other educators and students, and I was sharing my ideas in a public forum.
Project Development and Evaluation
As a nurse and as an educator, I have been involved with program development for many years. I have served on convention planning committees, designed one day educational programs about various clinical topics, and spoken widely at local nursing conferences. Until I began Walden, I had no idea that there were program planning models and conceptual frameworks to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of educational offerings. I had always relied upon other members of the committee with extensive experience and never before questioned the planning processes or researched other options. When I designed a class for professional development I essentially
decided upon the content, wrote objectives, created the presentation, and then handed out evaluation surveys. I had considered program planning very different from curriculum development and now I appreciate the similarities between both processes.
Using research and best practices to design an educational program allowed me to see so many areas that needed to be addressed that I had never before considered. Taking the results of my research and deciding the best way to address my peers’ learning needs required extensive reflection and research. In the past, I would have done exactly what I said in the first paragraph, nothing more and I would have considered that sufficient.
Now I realize that program planning and evaluation is a separate and distinct discipline with an evolving body of research. Finding Desimone’s (2009) conceptual model was eye opening for me and using something so simple and yet so profound as Vella’s Seven Design Steps (2008) to create each learning task made the evaluation process seamless. Leadership and Change
As I previously mentioned, there has been a change in the leadership at the nursing program since I completed the research portion of this project. I am now an administrator and my primary responsibilities are curriculum development and evaluation. The faculty have supported my promotion and have expressed to me that they consider me an “expert” in these areas based upon my actions since starting my doctoral studies.
I have been fortunate in my professional life to have always been considered a leader and change agent by my peers. As a staff nurse, I was always the one who approached administration with questions or concerns and was usually the first one to volunteer to help implement a new strategy or treatment on the nursing unit. The majority of my nursing professional life has been spent in management positions.
Quite honestly, I am not sure if I learned anything new about leadership or change from attending Walden or writing this project. I do believe that this entire process has reinforced what I already knew and caused me to reflect upon ways that I can become a more effective leader and change agent. In my new position, I often attend college-wide meetings where I am the face of the nursing program. My opinions, concerns, and
comments are no longer just my own but reflect the entire nursing program and the nursing profession.
Nursing education methods and role of nursing faculty has been debated
extensively over the past decade (Benner, Sutphen, Leonard & Day, 2010; IOM, 2011). Hegarty, Condon, Walsh and Sweeny (2009) discussed the future of nursing education and noted numerous challenges facing academic undergraduate faculty. These included the globalization of healthcare, advancements in technology, the changing patient demographic, and the increased complexities of clinical nursing care. This rapid change means that nurse educators “must be flexible, innovative and willing to re-think
traditional methods of nursing education” (Giddens, 2008, p. 8). In other words, all nurse educators must be leaders and change agents.
I am not sure if I would approach this project differently. I had originally considered individual faculty mentoring and coaching to address faculty learning needs and I have outlined the pros and cons of that approach. Ultimately, my research confirms that the program may need to undergo curriculum revision which is a lengthy and
arduous process. This process has started and the goal is to complete the new curriculum by the fall 2016 semester.
What was Learned about Self
When I started reflecting upon what I learned about myself over the course of my doctoral studies, I kept thinking about an article I read many years ago when I started a bachelors of nursing program. It was 1980 and my profession was in the initial stages of developing theories, conceptual frameworks, and defining nursing as a science. I was
required to read what has now become a classic work, Carper’s (1978) Fundamental
Patterns of Knowing in Nursing. In the next section I will discuss what I have learned
about myself as a scholar, as a project developer, and as a practitioner using Carper’s four fundamental patterns of knowing and relating them not only to nursing but to the art and science of teaching. These four patterns of knowing are (a) empirics, (b) esthetics, (c) personal knowledge, and (d) ethics, or the moral and ethical components.
As a Scholar
As a scholar, I use empirics or the science of education every day when I critically read, examine, apply, synthesize, and evaluate the educational literature. Since attending Walden and starting this process, I have learned that I love to do literature reviews! At least once every month I try to review nursing and higher education journals to determine what is new and relevant for my practice. I am comfortable sharing these articles with my peers and colleagues via email links or by posting pertinent articles in the faculty lounge. My friends have laughed and wondered if I ever read People magazine.
Since conducting this project, I have also made sure that I always cite any resources I have used when I teach, write reports, or present information for other educators. I know that in the past I did not always do that and now I appreciate how important it is to give credit to sources. Recently, I was asked to serve on a committee to help write a curriculum for a nurse residency program. Before the meeting I emailed links to articles about successful nurse residency programs and wrote a memo to all participants outlining best practices with citations. I believe that this practice has become a part of who I am as an educator.
As a Practitioner
How I practice nursing and teaching, how I develop curriculum and evaluation plans is esthetics or the art of my profession. To me this is the most important part of what I do as an educator. The art of teaching is the way I transfer the research into practice and make an impact on my students, my colleagues, my program, and ultimately my profession as a whole. When I decided to pursue my doctorate, I had many options available to me. The Doctorate in Nursing Practice (DNP) had recently been developed and I could have also attained my Doctorate in Philosophy in Nursing. I contemplated both options but eventually I decided that I knew nursing; what I did not fully understand was the art of teaching.